Oak Harbor staff outline Critical Areas Ordinance updates and tradeoffs of pursuing FEMA rating

Dennis Lefever, a city planning staff presenter, told the Planning Commission on June 9 that Oak Harbor is reviewing its Critical Areas Ordinance (Title 20) to align with state guidance and updated agency datasets. "State statute requires that we go through and periodically review and update our comprehensive plan as well as all of our development regulations," Lefever said, noting the ordinance was last consolidated as Ordinance 18-01.

Lefever summarized the five resource areas covered by the code: wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas and geologically hazardous areas. He said critical-areas mapping in the comprehensive plan dates to 2016 and needs updating to reflect improved state databases. "We will be working in that direction as well," he said of mapping updates.

Commissioners pressed staff on the floodplain work and the potential benefit of pursuing FEMA's Community Rating System (CRS). Lefever explained that CRS participation requires habitat assessments, ESA-conformant code language and FEMA review of the city's materials. "The rating system basically is the more code you have for the protection of structures in the flood plain, the less liable those structures are for damage," he said. "It would lower those annual premiums." He added that FEMA has not been responsive recently, and Ecology recommended scaling back the city's ordinance to include Ecology's recommendations only until FEMA can complete reviews.

Commissioner Jeffrey Ward and other commissioners asked about the tradeoffs: whether to keep ESA-focused language in hope FEMA later acknowledges it, or to remove it now to avoid imposing burdens without benefit. Lefever said staff could insert the verbiage later if FEMA re-engages but cautioned that CRS participation carries a monitoring burden and staffing implications. "There's a lot of monitoring involved in being part of that system," he said, noting the decision would need policy-level direction.

On mapping and hazard designation, staff said they rely heavily on state agency databases, especially the Department of Natural Resources and Ecology. Principal planner Kat Mac said adding maps to the comp plan would primarily affect future development review and SEPA (the project-level environmental review) rather than force retrofits of existing buildings. "I would say it's an impact to new structures and not a retrofit for basically existing structures," she told the commission.

Next steps, staff said, include refining policy language received from the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Oak Harbor Gary Oak Society, preparing redline drafts, and returning recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council as the broader development-regulation update proceeds. Staff anticipates continuing the work through the comp-plan and development-regulation update timeline next year.